Ashes 2013 - see mod warning in post 689

djimi · 11-07-2013 3:01pm

Gutted for the lad; truely brilliant knock and fully deserving of his ton.

I wonder where they will bat him in the second innings?

jank · 11-07-2013 3:16pm

Can anyone explain why that ball that was going to hit the wickets was not out?

Rascasse · 11-07-2013 3:29pm

Hawk Eye isn't perfect and it is only there to overturn howlers, not marginal decisions. If less than half the hall is pitching in line or hitting (or hits pad more than 2.5 meters from the stumps) then it's left with whatever the umpire decided as there is no conclusive proof to reverse the decision.

smackbunnybaby · 11-07-2013 3:49pm

Hey guys, wondering why tea was called at 7.4 in an over?

Why not throw 2 more deliveries to get to finish the over?

jimmy the car · 11-07-2013 3:56pm

smackbunnybaby wrote: »

Hey guys, wondering why tea was called at 7.4 in an over?

Why not throw 2 more deliveries to get to finish the over?

Thinking that myself as well, only thing now is it's a Pietersen/Cook partnership which if got going could rack up a big score....if Starc doen't get his hatrick that is!

djimi · 11-07-2013 4:17pm

They have always called lunch/tea/stumps in the middle of the last over of a session if a wicket falls. Not really sure why!

Luckycharms_74 · 11-07-2013 7:50pm

KevIRL wrote: »

The nut radio sport show.

Yeah it's unreal tbh. They have all angles covered. Listening to the ashes round up now, great way to catch up on how the day unfolded.

Regarding Agar, he played for Henley on Thames in the Home Counties premier league. They had his coach on 5 live talking about Agar and that he made a 50 before in another match. They also said he can really bat and not just a slogger trying to bang out some runs.
He could be one for the future

kryogen · 11-07-2013 11:55pm

Ponting was quite positive about Agar also, looked very good out there today. Deffo not a number 11, hopefully it will turn out to be a great debut

dfx- · 12-07-2013 4:40am

Have I missed something in the furore over Trott?

There was no clear evidence he hit the ball - even Snicko later on - and he was plumb lbw which is the clear evidence to overturn Dar's decision.

Rascasse · 12-07-2013 5:21am

dfx- wrote: »

Have I missed something in the furore over Trott?

There was no clear evidence he hit the ball - even Snicko later on - and he was plumb lbw which is the clear evidence to overturn Dar's decision.

There was not clear evidence he didn't hit the ball either. Original decision was not out so conclusive evidence should have been required to overturn it. My gut reaction was he nicked it, most of the Sky heads thought he nicked it, and Trott thought he had nicked it. Unfortunately the side on hot spot camera cannot record and playback at the same time and as they had the footage of Root's catch cued up it didn't pick up the conclusive view.

Erasmus is a good umpire but I feel Trott should have been given the benefit of the doubt considering the missing camera and original call.

Edit:Just reading the morning news and seen that the ICC actually apologised to England and admitted Erasmus was wrong. Can't remember that happening before.

djimi · 12-07-2013 9:40am

To be honest I thought that on viewing Trotts dismissal I thought that it was blatantly obvious that he hit it; the ball quite clearly nicks off the edge of the bat onto the pads. It certainly was not conclusive enough to suggest that the original not out decision should have been overturned. I have nothing against technology in umpiring, in fact I warmly welcome it, but in this case it got it wrong and just goes to show that we should not be relying solely on the decisions of technology.

padd b1975 · 12-07-2013 9:49am

djimi wrote: »

To be honest I thought that on viewing Trotts dismissal I thought that it was blatantly obvious that he hit it; the ball quite clearly nicks off the edge of the bat onto the pads. It certainly was not conclusive enough to suggest that the original not out decision should have been overturned. I have nothing against technology in umpiring, in fact I warmly welcome it, but in this case it got it wrong and just goes to show that we should not be relying solely on the decisions of technology.

Not only are they relying on technology (which I agree with), I think it's a bit rich of them to rely on a TV company to provide them with that technology.

Apology on behalf of the Trott decision is an empty gesture too, in my opinion.

Come 11 o' clock this morning, his bat and pads will still be in his locker gathering dust until Lords.

dfx- · 12-07-2013 10:50am

Rascasse wrote: »

There was not clear evidence he didn't hit the ball either. Original decision was not out so conclusive evidence should have been required to overturn it. My gut reaction was he nicked it, most of the Sky heads thought he nicked it, and Trott thought he had nicked it. Unfortunately the side on hot spot camera cannot record and playback at the same time and as they had the footage of Root's catch cued up it didn't pick up the conclusive view.

I thought he didn't hit it, Erasmus clearly thought he didn't hit it, Snicko says he didn't hit it. Has Dar come out and said why he didn't give it?

I don't think it's on the Darryl Harper scale of bad decisions

Luckycharms_74 · 12-07-2013 11:43am

Eng 104-2 (Cook 38*, Pietersen 57*)

Luckycharms_74 · 12-07-2013 12:02pm

WICKET- Pietersen b Pattinson 64 (Eng 121-3 57 ovs)

Masked Man · 12-07-2013 2:20pm

That kid is by far the best thing about the Ashes so far.

Rascasse · 12-07-2013 5:27pm

Crikey, Broad edged and caught, Dar didn't give it and Broad didn't walk. Payback for Trott? Aussies with no DRS appeals.

Hunterbiker · 12-07-2013 5:31pm

Rascasse wrote: »

Crikey, Broad edged and caught, Dar didn't give it and Broad didn't walk. Payback for Trott? Aussies with no DRS appeals.

Never walk! As they said on TMS An Aussie wouldn't have walked so fair play to him.

donfers · 12-07-2013 7:16pm

Hunterbiker wrote: »

Never walk! As they said on TMS An Aussie wouldn't have walked so fair play to him.

yes and we hate the aussies for it, it's called bad sportsmanship - never going to listen to a lecture about fair play from england again, furthermore it is far worse than the trott incident which was just a technical mishap and a 50/50 call - this was a guy who was 100% out who knew that and didn't walk, poor umpiring, poor sportsmanship and as I said England can't look down their nose at Aussie gamesmanship again

I expected better from Broad, winning is one thing, winning with dignity and class is another

Dozen Wicked Words · 12-07-2013 7:42pm

donfers wrote: »

I expected better from Broad, winning is one thing, winning with dignity and class is another

I wouldn't expect anything better from Broad, not a pleasant individual and certainly wouldn't associate the word class with him.

Otherwise another good days cricket, and it's going to be a great series I think. Two evenly matched teams both capable of brilliance but also total collapse at drop of a hat.

Hunterbiker · 12-07-2013 7:45pm

I don't hate the Aussies for doing it. Its been part of their game for donkey's years. It's not the 1st time an England player has not walked and he won't be the last.

It all adds to what has been a totally absorbing test match. Today was the first proper day of real test cricket - lots of tension. It' s great!

All that's gone on here is that Broad waited for the umpire. They'd used up their referrals and that was that.

booth70 · 12-07-2013 8:00pm

Its about time players got banned for a match or two if they don't walk when they clearly know they are out:mad:

......and it's about time the ICC get their heads outta their a**es and give the third umpire the right to over-rule an obvious howler from the on-field umpire irrespective of referrals remaining

That said I don't think that decision is goin to make a huge difference to the outcome of the match.....England have more than enough already to close
out of this match.....or do they;)

mike65 · 12-07-2013 8:09pm

England have 4 left handers to torment on an increasingly worn and slow pitch when the Aussies get back in so it could be fun on the final day.

padd b1975 · 12-07-2013 8:30pm

Don't think England can lose now, I can't see Australia batting for +1 day on that especially if England break through early in their second innings.

Calling 1-0 England.

Aussies need weather for a draw I would think.

djimi · 12-07-2013 9:46pm

booth70 wrote: »

Its about time players got banned for a match or two if they don't walk when they clearly know they are out:mad:

Why? There are two umpires and numerous techological elements watching the game; let them do their job and give you out if you are out. Obviously I prefer to see players walk if they know that they are out, but Im not going to lose the head with someone if they dont.

booth70 · 13-07-2013 8:36am

djimi wrote: »

Why? There are two umpires and numerous techological elements watching the game; let them do their job and give you out if you are out. Obviously I prefer to see players walk if they know that they are out, but Im not going to lose the head with someone if they dont.

Cricket used to be a gentleman's game.....not anymore!

If Dinesh Ramdin got banned recently for claiming a catch that wasn't so should somebody like Broad for standing his ground when he knew he had hit the cover of the ball.......both amount to cheating for me

If there are so many cameras watching each and every incident why not use them to make the correct decision?.....If the third umpire can call the batsman back if he has been dismissed of a no-ball that the on-field umpire has missed then surely they can over-rule the on-field umpire over a blatant howler like yesterday

Dozen Wicked Words · 13-07-2013 8:57am

booth70 wrote: »

Cricket used to be a gentleman's game.....not anymore!

If Dinesh Ramdin got banned recently for claiming a catch that wasn't so should somebody like Broad for standing his ground when he knew he had hit the cover of the ball.......both amount to cheating for me

If there are so many cameras watching each and every incident why not use them to make the correct decision?.....If the third umpire can call the batsman back if he has been dismissed of a no-ball that the on-field umpire has missed then surely they can over-rule the on-field umpire over a blatant howler like yesterday

I don't like Broad but he is no different from the huge majority of cricketers when it comes to walking. Professional sportsmen rarely worry about the spirit of any sport. Far more Broads and Clarkes in the game than Gilchrists.

Actually, plenty of amateur cricketers will leave it up to the umpire to give them out too. Who or how will you ban them, or the week in week out county or province games that aren't down on tv, how do you ban them?

Cricket is no different from any other sport, footballers may put ball in net with their hand, if it's allowed most players won't tell ref otherwise. If a rugby player hasn't grounded the ball for a try or loses control of ball and ref gives try, have never seen one player turn around and tell ref not to award try. If a track runner knowingly steps out of his lane, wins the race, does he disqualify himself? If tennis player knows opponents ball is in, but umpire calls it out, would many correct him? Etc etc etc.

djimi · 13-07-2013 9:34am

booth70 wrote: »

Cricket used to be a gentleman's game.....not anymore!

If Dinesh Ramdin got banned recently for claiming a catch that wasn't so should somebody like Broad for standing his ground when he knew he had hit the cover of the ball.......both amount to cheating for me

If there are so many cameras watching each and every incident why not use them to make the correct decision?.....If the third umpire can call the batsman back if he has been dismissed of a no-ball that the on-field umpire has missed then surely they can over-rule the on-field umpire over a blatant howler like yesterday

What Ramdin did was blatently cheating; he picked up a ball off the ground and claimed it as a catch. While its along the same lines as not walking perhaps, its considerably worse (akin to driving the ball to mid on and then trying to claim that you didnt hit it!).

Not walking is a bit different; there are times when you can nick the ball and genuinely not know; I remember walking off in utter disgust ranting and raving having been given out caught behind, convinced that I didnt hit it, and when I got back in I was told the nick could be heard in the pavillion! It happens. Thats not to say that people dont not walk when they know they hit it of course, but its not so black and white as something like what Ramdin did.

To be honest, as a cricket lover I know I should be more vocal about upholding the spirit of the game, but in this day and age where series such as the Ashes mean so much I can completely understand a batsman standing their ground and letting the umpires and the technology make the final decision. It two on field umpires and a third umpire with TV replays, hotspot, snicko etc cant find it in them to give you out then as far as Im concerned you aint out!

Im not even going to get into how I feel about the it when playing. Suffice to say the number of shockingly poor umpiring decisions and nonsense wides that get given against you sort of kills your spirit of the game and your desire to give the opposition any further advantage...

Brussels Sprout · 13-07-2013 11:17am

From the BBC website this morning:

FIRST BALL SHOCKER- Eng 331-6
I say this with no hint of exaggeration. Mitchell Starc's first ball of the day is simply the worst delivery I have ever seen in Test cricket. So, so wide, but also a beamer, bouncing past the dive of wicketkeeper Brad Haddin. It runs away for five no balls. A bit stiff, Mitch?

Now I want to see it

Rascasse · 13-07-2013 3:41pm

Root gets Cowan on nelson.

Getting tight for England, need a couple of quick ones to steady the nerves.

booth70 · 13-07-2013 4:26pm

djimi wrote: »

It two on field umpires and a third umpire with TV replays, hotspot, snicko etc cant find it in them to give you out then as far as Im concerned you aint out!

That is precisely why I am saying that the third umpire SHOULD be given the right to over-rule an on-field umpire's decision....if the third umpire had this power then Broad would have been sent packing yesterday and technology would have been used correctly

Rascasse · 13-07-2013 4:36pm

booth70 wrote: »

That is precisely why I am saying that the third umpire SHOULD be given the right to over-rule an on-field umpire's decision....if the third umpire had this power then Broad would have been sent packing yesterday and technology would have been used correctly

It's up to Asutralia to use the technology correctly. You get two opportunities to overturn bad decisions, not to gamble on marginal LBW calls. If the third umpire could step in at any point it would only encourage teams to use the DRS system to gamble.

The only people in the wrong yesterday was Dar for making the mistake and Pup for wasting his reviews. As Bill Lawry said "It's for the umpire to do his job and me to do mine". Nobody walks.

booth70 · 13-07-2013 4:38pm

132/3

A good 70 - 80 run partnership is what Australia need now to set the cat amongst the pigeons;)..........they also have Agar coming in at no: 11:)

the groutch · 13-07-2013 5:23pm

if the Aussies can make it to the end of the day without losing another wicket they'll be firmly in the driving seat.

Rascasse · 13-07-2013 5:40pm

Another wasted review. Not the cleverest is he?

Edit. Now Hughes Smith gone too. One brings two.

matthew8 · 13-07-2013 5:43pm

Every time one team gains the advantage they throw it away.

booth70 · 13-07-2013 6:16pm

Australia are one good batsman light in the middle order

Siddle made more runs than the top order batsmen did recently during their tour of India!

It's not over yet I think.....another twist to come surely:)

matthew8 · 13-07-2013 6:32pm

This partnership must be the last chance.

Skid X · 13-07-2013 7:28pm

booth70 wrote: »

It's not over yet I think.....another twist to come surely:)

I agree, Australia are a bit short but it would only take one decent partnership to get them within sight of the win.

The pitch isn't doing a huge amount, if Agar can recreate his first Innings magic it could be very interesting.

Either way, it's great to see such a competitive First Test. You can't beat a close Ashes Series.

Dozen Wicked Words · 13-07-2013 7:35pm

Botham and Strauss talking like it's a done deal. Australia definitely not out of it, but pitch is only going to get worse and Swann looks to be getting good use out of it.

Think these two in and Siddle are their realistic last hope. Hope England skittle them out in an hour though!

mike65 · 13-07-2013 8:08pm

Australia will not win from here, you'd have to be deluded to think so.

(now there's post to quote back at me sometime tomorrow!)

mike65 · 14-07-2013 10:59am

25 C and foggy with the lights on!

padd b1975 · 14-07-2013 12:18pm

223/8.

mike65 · 14-07-2013 12:34pm

Goodnight Irene.....

padd b1975 · 14-07-2013 12:39pm

Over by lunch, think it would be better for the series as a whole if Australia had won the first one.

djimi · 14-07-2013 12:39pm

mike65 wrote: »

Goodnight Irene.....

*awaits inevitable revenge for Edgebaston 2005*

mike65 · 14-07-2013 12:54pm

C'mon! :mad: but I'd take lunch as usual if I was England.

padd b1975 · 14-07-2013 12:54pm

51 needed!!

Rascasse · 14-07-2013 12:55pm

Finn is going to screw this up.

mike65 · 14-07-2013 12:55pm

Is it me or has England had poor field settings? Far too many too close in for my liking.

Ashes 2013 - see mod warning in post 689

Comments